We live on a planet in a universe made up of space, time, matter, and energy. Why is there a universe here instead of nothing?

The Universe Had a Beginning

On the website www.sciencefocus.com in an article titled: “What was before the Big Bang? Everything you need to know,” it states: “The Universe has not existed forever. It was born. Around 13.82 billion years ago, matter, energy, space – and time – erupted into being in a fireball called the Big Bang.”

In the next paragraph it states: “A universe popping into existence out of nothing is so bonkers that scientists had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the idea. But the evidence is compelling.”

On the website www.allaboutscience.org, it discusses the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It states: “The implications of the Second Law of Thermodynamics are considerable. The universe is constantly losing usable energy and never gaining. We logically conclude the universe is not eternal. The universe had a finite beginning -- the moment at which it was at "zero entropy" (its most ordered possible state). Like a wind-up clock, the universe is winding down, as if at one point it was fully wound up and has been winding down ever since.”

One General Science textbook described it this way:

“If you could run the life of the universe in reverse, like a film, you would see the universe contracting until it disappeared in a flash of light, leaving nothing. In the realm of the universe, nothing really means nothing. Not only matter and energy would disappear, but also space and time. However, physicists theorize that from this state of nothingness the universe began in a gigantic explosion about 16.5 billion years ago. …the Big Bang”

DISCOVER magazine stated it this way:

“The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing – zero, nada. And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere.” It featured an article by Alan Guth and his vacuum fluctuation.

Alan Guth and his "Vacuum Fluction":

“In a moment of time, in a spot no bigger than a dime, a vacuum fluctuated.” According to the article in DISCOVERY, he agreed that before this there was a state of nothingness.

Thinking Logically:

That creates a few problems. It can’t happen in a moment of time, if time didn’t exist yet. A spot no bigger than a dime is a small spot, but it still represents space, when supposedly there was none. A vacuum is the absence of matter, but it also requires the existence of matter, when supposedly there was none. A fluctuation of any kind requires energy, when supposedly there was none. His explanation for where space, time, matter, and energy came from would seem to require the existence of space, time, matter, and energy or it wouldn’t happen.

Basically, what we know is: the universe exists, and it appears to be expanding. The rest seems more like: “Once upon a time, long ago and far away.”

Applying the Laws of Physics

1. The Law of Cause and Effect

The universal Law of Cause-and-Effect states that for every effect there is a definite cause.  The effect would be the universe made up of space, time, matter, and energy coming into existence out of a state of nothingness.  What was the cause?  Most today seem to indicate it happened by accident for no purpose, without a cause.   Is that scientific?

2. The Law of Motion (Inertia)

Newton's First Law of Motion states that a body at rest will remain in that state, unless acted upon by an external force or agent, and a body in motion will remain in that state unless acted upon by an external force or agent. Sometimes called the Law of Inertia.

Question:

Would a state of nothingness be like a state of perfect rest?   If so, it should remain in that state, unless acted upon by an external force or agent.  Scientifically, it should not change, in and of itself.

3. The First Law of Thermodynamics

Matter, and or energy, cannot be created or destroyed; but can only be transformed from one form into another. They should have added: “through natural processes.”

Dr. Robert Gauge in Origins and Destiny,1986, p. 17 stated: "The First Law has been the object of considerable thought since it was first introduced to the world by William Kelvin and Rudolph Clausius.  It forbids a natural process from bringing something from nothing."

Based on the First Law of Thermodynamics; a universe made up of space, time, matter, and energy should not come into existence out of a state of nothingness through a natural process.  Combine that with the Law of Cause and Effect; it would appear that whatever that first Cause was, it could not be what would be considered a natural process.

Factor in the Law of Inertia; and whatever that first Cause was, it would have to be in the form of an external force or agent that acted upon that state of nothingness to bring something out of nothing. How do we put this in the form of a hypothesis?

It is extremely important to keep in mind that it is the observations that generate hypotheses. My hypothesis should be based solely on what is observed. The laws of science are well established observations. It is these observations that should be used in formulating my hypothesis.

Simply put: Something other than a naturalistic first Cause, acted upon a state of nothingness and brought a universe made up of space, time, matter, and energy into existence.

Scientists Have Biases

If we could somehow set our worldview biases aside, and concentrate on scientific investigation only, how much more might be accomplished in the name of science.  Under those conditions we might already have a better explanation for the beginning of the universe.

If you are reading this document, you are probably looking at this issue through one of two worldview investigative lenses. Worldviews are like wearing a pair of sunglasses. Sometimes we have sunglasses on and forget we are wearing them. If someone else might attempt to remove those sunglasses for us, we will probably react defensively.

Scientists and other folks react the same way regarding their worldviews. I have a serious question for you. Are you able to clearly separate your philosophical worldview from real scientific investigation and not be affected by it?

My desire is that at the very least, you would be an honest sincere seeker of truth. I hope you will develop a real passion for knowing the truth, not just looking for evidence to support what we already want to believe.

Analyse and Draw Conclusions

An explosion from nothingness would seem to be in violation of the Law of Cause and Effect; the First Law of Thermodynamics; and the Law of Inertia.

How do we determine the origin of that First Cause?  Most in the field of science would attempt to determine the original First Cause based on their philosophical worldview, be that a natural or a supernatural one.

Supposedly, a famous Russian astronomer once said: “Either there is a god or there isn't one, both possibilities are frightful, because if there is a god then we better find out who he is, and find out what he wants and do what he says.  If there is no god then we are in trouble also, because we are hurdling through space at 66,000 miles an hour and nobody is in charge.”